STATE DEPARTMENTS OF AGRICULTURE

GEORGE H. GOLDSBOROUGH

STATE departments of agriculture CONSUMER PROTECTION regulatory ac- have a wide variety of programs tivities by State departments of agri- to protect food from deterioration as culture include: it moves through marketing channels • Inspection of raw commodities—red from farmer to consumer, and to meat, poultry, eggs, fruits and vege- assure consumers of wholesome food. tables, dairy products, and seafood ; Regulatory activities aim primarily • Inspection of food handling estab- at consumer protection and deal most- lishments which process, store, and ly with food products moving within a distribute foods, and of eating and State. Consumer protection programs drinking establishments; and operated in cooperation with either • Inspection for food additives, pesti- the U.S. Department of Agriculture cides, and animal feed medication. (USDA) or the Food and Drug Admin- In many States, departments of istration of the Department of Health, health administer consumer protec- Education, and Welfare (HEW) may tion work. In others this is handled by also cover products moving interstate. such agencies as the Consumer Pro- Information and service programs tection Department, Livestock Sani- covering food grading, standardiza- tary Board, State Chemical Labora- tion, certification, and quality control tories, State Egg Board, Agricultural may include products moving both Experiment Station, or Laboratory between States and within States. Department. Agriculture departments Grading programs are generally handle raw product inspection and conducted with USDA's Consumer food processing establishment inspec- and Marketing Service and uniform tion. Eating and drinking establish- Federal grades are employed. If the ments are most often the responsibility State alone is involved, the grades are of health departments. frequently patterned after existing or * * * recommended USD A grades. In some George H. Goldsborough is Director of cases, grading is mandatory by State Matching Fund Programs, Consumer and law or regulation. Marketing Service. 329 State Agencies Administering Consumer Food Protection Activities Interest code—other agency: (i) Fluid milk. (6) Poultry. (2) Dairy products. (7) Eggs. (3) Meat. (8) Fruits and vegetables. (4) Fish. (9) Other foods. (5) Shellfish. (10) Eating and drinking places.

Foods and associated processing and distribution Interests of State Principal agency Other agency other agency Alabama Agriculture Health i, 3, 10 Alaska Health Agriculture 3,8 Arizona Health Dairy Commission 2 Livestock Sanitary Board. . 2, 3 Agriculture and Horticul- 8 ture Commission. Egg Inspector 7 Arkansas Health Plant Board 8 California.. Health Agriculture i> 2, 3, 6, 7, 8,9 Colorado Health Agriculture. - 2, 6, 7, 8, 9 Connecticut Consumer Protec- Agriculture i, 8, 9 tion. Health 5 Delaware Health Agriculture 2, 6, 7, 8, 9 Florida Agriculture Health i» 5, 10 Hotel and Restaurant Com- 10 mission. Georgia Agriculture Health i, 5, 10 Hawaii Health Agriculture 3, 6) 8 Idaho Health Agritulture i» 2, 3, 6, 7, 8,9 Illinois Agriculture Health 1,10 Indiana Health University 6, 7, 8 Iowa Agriculture Health (*) Kansas Health Agriculture 2, 7, 8 Health and Restaurant 9, 10 Board. Kentucky Health Agriculture 7 Louisiana Health Agriculture 6,8, 9 Maine Agriculture. Health 10 Sea and Shore Fisheries 5 Maryland Health Agriculture 2,7 Massachusetts Health Agriculture i, 6, 7, 8 Michigan Agriculture Health i Minnesota Agriculture Health 10 Mississippi Health Agriculture 2, 3, 7, 8 Missouri Health Agriculture 2, 7, 9 Montana Health Livestock Sanitary Board.. 2, 6 Agriculture 2, 3, 7, 8, 9 Nebraska Agriculture Health (*) Nevada Health Agriculture 7, 9 New Hampshire Health Agriculture 6, 7, 8, 9 New Jersey Health Agriculture 6, 7, 8 New Mexico Health Agriculture i, 7, 8, 9 New York Agriculture Health 1,10 North Carolina Agriculture Health 10 North Dakota Laboratories Com- Agriculture i, 2, 9 mission. Health i, 9, i o Livestock Sanitary Board. . 3 Ohio Agriculture Health 10 Oklahoma Health Agriculture 2, 3, 7, 9 Oregon Agriculture Health 10 Pennsylvania Agriculture Health 10 Rhode Island Health Agriculture 7, 8 *No information available on specific interests. 330 Foods and associated processing and distribution Interests of State Principal agency Other agency other agency South Carolina Agriculture Health 2, 9, i o South Dakota Agriculture Health 10 Tennessee Agriculture Health, Conservation, and 10 Commerce. Texas Health Agriculture 8 Utah Agriculture Health 10 Vermont Health Agriculture i, 7, 8, 9 Virginia Agriculture Health i, 2, 4, 5, 10 Washington Agriculture Health i, 4, 5, 10 West Virginia Agriculture Health i, 9, 10 Wisconsin Agriculture Health 1,10 Wyoming Agriculture Health 10

Exclusive of any payments to the cant developments in the businesses local governments in support of com- that they review. This information panion programs performed by coun- may then be pieced together to pin- ties and municipalities, the State pro- point the needs, identify trends, de- grams for consumer protection during velop priorities, and adjust programs. the 1964 fiscal year that ended June 3O5 1964, cost $7.6 million for meat THE STATES have enacted hundreds of and poultry inspection, plus $6.3 laws for consumer protection. These million for dairy products inspection, laws fall roughly into two categories. and some $2 million for supervision of First there are statutes similar in many eating and drinking establishments. ways to Federal laws covering meat, Expenditures have risen rapidly in milk, food service establishments, feeds, the I o years from 1954 to 1964, rang- and pesticides. ing from an increase of about 70 per- These statutes and the resulting cent for dairy products to 93 percent State programs have been influenced for meats, 133 percent for feeds, and by the Federal laws and by the recom- 159 percent for pesticides. mended codes of Federal agencies like USDA and HEW. OVER 4,000 man-years were devoted The second group of laws gives in fiscal year 1964 to consumer pro- special recognition to problems or in- tection activities related to food. Some terests within State boundaries. 260 man-years were for administra- Measures for regulating native prod- tion, 3,200 for inspection, and 756 for ucts like maple sirup and establish- laboratory analyses of samples of food ments like frozen food locker plants which is destined for and moving and bakeries are typical. And in some through the marketing system. cases, the State agencies are tied in The inspectors assigned to these pro- with local and municipal groups. grams check on industry adherence to laws, regulations, and agency stand- DAIRY PRODUCTS inspection is a key part ards where products are produced, of State consumer protection work. processed, stored, ofí'ered for sale, or Inspectors check dairy farms, receiv- prepared for immediate consumption. ing stations—including bulk milk tank These inspectors collect samples of trucks—processing and pasteurization products for field examination or for plants, delivery trucks, and occasion- later laboratory analysis. ally retail stores and food service In addition, the inspectors explain establishments. requirements to regulated establish- Products which are inspected in- ments and give technical support. clude milk, butter, cheese, and ice The inspectors also gather informa- cream, as well as soft-serve dairy items. tion on production, control, and dis- On the farm, inspectors see if cows tribution of products and any signifi- have been tested for disease and 331 whether the milk handling sanitation inspectors working under their super- meets the requirements. vision. The principal emphasis is In the processing plant the methods put on wholesomeness of the meat at used are checked and products ana- the time of slaughter. After the meat lyzed for butterfat content, total solids, enters the channels of commerce it bacteria, presence of foreign substances then becomes subject to spot checks. like pesticide residues, evidence of pasteurization, claimed vitamin con- A 1963 SURVEY by the Intergovern- tent, temperature, and added water. mental Relations Subcommittee of the Labeling practices are also observed. House of Representatives showed that 32 States have laws for poultry proc- TECHNIQUES include both direct in- essing inspection. Seventeen of these spection and sampling for laboratory provide for sanitary inspection only, analysis, with special emphasis on and 15 for wholesomeness inspection grade A pasteurized milk. The pro- of the product. Of the latter, nine grams emphasize sanitation and prod- programs are voluntary and six pro- uct quality. grams are mandatory. In the grade A program, sanitation is Two States—^Maine and North regulated by agency employees con- Dakota—carry out poultry inspection ducting at least the minimum number for wholesomeness in cooperation with of inspections recommended by the the Poultry Division of tîie Consumer Public Health Service of HEW. and Marketing Service and under the These recommendations are often Federal Poultry Products Inspection written into the State laws and State Act. Inspection personnel on the proc- regulations. Furthermore, product essing lines are qualified and licensed quality is assured by sampling. by the Poultry Division, but they are State employees. ABOUT 15 PERCENT of commercially In all States except the two which slaughtered meat and poultry is are cooperating with USDA, the State processed in plants shipping only in inspection system services only intra- intrastate commerce, and is covered by state plants. a State service in most States. In No- vember 1965, a total of 37 States had INFORMAL COOPERATION with USDA statutes providing various types of exists in many States. USDA inspec- red meat inspection service, and 31 of tion personnel assist in training State the 37 were actually carrying out some inspectors and drafting proposed legis- type of meat inspection activity. lation and regulations. A model meat A review of State laws on red meat and poultry inspection law has been reveals a great variety of requirements. developed by USDA for the States to Thirty States require preslaughter in- use as a guide. spection of every animal and 30 A close working relationship exists require examination of all carcasses between inspection and disease eradi- and viscera. cation activities in both USDA and Thirty-four States provide for super- State departments of agriculture labo- vision of plant and equipment sani- ratories. This has helped to combat tation, 15 for reinspection of meats that any disease outbreaks among poultry may have deteriorated during han- flocks. dling, and 28 for examination of all In addition, the State veterinary meat during processing. officials and industry service personnel Twenty-eight check for false or de- have been aided in fostering better ceptive labels, and 27 require destruc- poultry management practices that tion of meat and meat products unfit have cut producer and processing for human consumption. Meat inspection programs are car- Virtually all States have sanitary ried on by veterinarians who have lay inspection authority for poultry plants. 332 Inspectors of other food products the past were considered mainly for visit establishments where food is the farmer's benefit, the consuming processed, stored, offered for sale, or public has an increasing stake in the in a few cases prepared for immediate newer programs. By devoting more consumption. Within this range are attention to processing, these programs retail and wholesale stores, plus ware- strive to prevent farmers from inad- houses, soft drink manufacturers, can- vertently giving medication to their neries, bakeries, frozen food locker animals which might result in residues plants, and confectioneries. in meat, milk, or eggs with potential General food inspectors give their consumer hazard. main attention to products and opera- tions not covered by the dairy, meat, INSPECTION OF food service establish- and poultry programs, and devote ments is another State activity. little time to products regulated by Restaurants, taverns, and other fa- other units at State or local levels. cilities where food is prepared for im- mediate consumption are surveyed. FOOD PRODUCTS are examined and Food handlers, their practices and the sampled for contamination or adul- facilities they use are checked. Often teration, and labels checked to see if an attempt is made to determine the they are both accurate and adequate. source of foods like milk, meat, and Sanitary conditions of the facilities are shellfish. surveyed. The processes and pro- Inspectors make periodic on-the- cedures are checked for adherence to spot inspections but resort only infre- agency standards. Information is also quently to sampling; agencies that use recorded about any new products, swab tests to detect bacterial contam- practices, and processes. ination are the exceptions. Most food The health and habits of employees service programs are carried on by the are noted. Occasionally, special in- health agencies. vestigations are conducted to find out the sources of questionable prod- STATE AGENCIES rely heavily on labora- ucts such as rejected incubator eggs. tory analyses to confirm judgments of A minority of the programs emphasize compliance in the marketing system. thoroughness of inspection at the Every State has one or more labora- processing stage, with most giving tories used in analyzing food products. primary attention to sanitation. The man-years of analytical staff time add up to about 900 for milk products, FEED INSPECTORS visit farms, farm sup- meat, poultry, other foods, feeds, and pliers, feed mills and mixers, and in drugs.. some cases retail stores that carry pet The State departments of agriculture foods. possess important powers to regulate Samples of feed for farm and domes- commerce in farm products, assist tic animals are collected so laboratory farmers, and protect consumers. The analysts can compare ingredients with most effective enforcement weapons the label guarantees. have been embargoes upon products Only a few programs devote much moving within the State, and con- effort to inspection and examination of demnation of foodstuffs determined feed manufacturing or mixing proc- unfit or hazardous. Permit and regis- esses. Under stimulation from the tration control are also widely used. Food and Drug Administration, how- ever, techniques are being enlarged to THE FACT that the agency represents include such inspection, due to process- the power and authority of the State ing problems from the introduction of is appreciated by those covered by drugs in livestock feed. regiüation and is frequently sufficient to influence industry to uphold laws, WHILE FEED inspection programs of regulations, and standards. 333 Over 90 percent of the compliance come under the Public Health Service, activities of State agencies are con- HEW. The Food and Drug Admin- cerned with persuading firms to comply istration of HEW also has responsi- rather than employing disciplinary bilities in food. Both USDA and HEW measures. Educational and preventive have responsibilities in pesticides. programs arc used extensively by the States to achieve this purpose. MOST STATE DEPARTMENTS of agricul- Agencies tell the regulated operator ture are quite active in food grading, what is expected and instruct him in standardization, and certification pro- proper equipment, plant, and proce- grams—generally in cooperation with dures. Once an operator is in com- USDA. While grading programs are pliance, the State inspectors help him designed primarily to facilitate trading to maintain standards. between buyer and seller, they have as indirect benefits reduction in economic RESPONSIBILITY FOR consumer protec- loss through deterioration, and con- tion is diffused among State agencies sumer protection against spoiled and partly because it is split between sev- low quality food. eral Federal agencies with which the States work closely. Consumer protec- As A RELATED EFFORT, many State de- tion activities for meat and poultry partments of agriculture conduct spe- shipped in interstate commerce is the cial service and informational pro- responsibility of USDA's Consumer grams with producers and marketers and Marketing Service. Fish is the to put to work their research findings responsibility of the Bureau of Com- on quality control and maintenance. mercial Fisheries, which is an Interior These services include specialists ex- Department agency. pert at in-plant quality control and in Fluid milk, shellfish, food service demonstrating use of grades and stand- establishments, and interstate carriers ards to marketing agencies and con- sumers. Producers get advice on the Chef prepares thawed scrambled eggs, pack- optimum time of harvest to insure the aged in a disposable plastic bag under a longest possible shelf life. quality frozen egg program developed by New York State in cooperation with USDA's match- ing fund program. With liquid whole eggs CONSUMERS are instructed on use of packaged this way, volume feeders can pre- grades in identifying product qualities pare 1,800 scrambled eggs in 13 minutes. in the retail store. This is confined, of Preparing the same number of shelled eggs takes 1^4 hours. course, to products that have a grade marking on the package and where the wholesale grades are also suitable for consumer grades. The principal items are eggs, poultry and red meat, and fresh fruits and vegetables. The State departments of agriculture occasionally engage in experimental work seeking better methods of quality control, although reliance is placed primarily upon researchers in USDA, State land-grant universities, and the food industry.

A SIGNIFICANT PROPORTION of State service and informational work is con- ducted under the Federal-State Match- ing Fund Marketing Service Program. The balance of this chapter describes only the matching fund work because of lack of documentation for work car- ried on with State funds. Federal payments, as authorized by section 204(b) of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946, arc made under cooperative agreements between USDA and the State departments of agriculture for any marketing service activities upon a matching fund basis. States contribute at least half the cost; State personnel do the work. This program spurs improvements in marketing agricultural commodi- ties. It serves to bridge the gap between research and its application, as well as to stimulate the adoption of sound marketing methods and practices. B. P. Holden, operator of a pork barbecue STATE PROJECTS in the quality field business at Youngsville, N.C., in a converted show marketers how to maintain or bus where he once barbecued his meat. improve quality of the products they handle so deterioration and spoilage can be reduced and products placed meats in 14 States, and grain and seed before consumers in the best possible in 10 States. Improving and maintain- condition. This field embraces such ing quality is a continuing task with activities as: changes in the emphasis and direction • Checking products at various stages made as any new problems arise and in marketing for off-quality condition, better methods and techniques are finding the cause of the quality loss, developed. and describing what corrective steps The 37 States carrying on quality should be taken. improvement projects were: Alabama, • Showing farmers and marketing Alaska, Arkansas, California, Colo- agencies how to determine the proper rado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, maturity of products for harvesting. Hawaii, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, • Demonstrating proper methods of Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massa- picking, packing, handling, and trans- chusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mis- porting products in order to protect sissippi, Montana, New Hampshire, quality and to separate products into New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, quality groups, and encouraging the North Carolina, North Dakota, Okla- use of the Federal and Federal-State homa, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South grades. Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, • Establishing criteria for State grad- ing of items not covered by Federal or Mr. Holden and his wife now operate from this Federal-State grades. new plant, built with technical assistance pro- • Assisting on ways to prevent deteri- vided under USDA's matching fund program oration of products in storage. in cooperation with the State of North Caro- • Determining and showing market- lina. They are loading their station wagon to ing firms what containers will best deliver the barbecue product. protect quality.

MATCHING FUND PROGRAMS for fruits and vegetables were conducted during the fiscal year 1965 in 28 States, for poultry and eggs in 24 States, dairy ■ ■I products in 17 States, livestock and ■ ■I ^^ellen^ toAtina, ;I055. • • • -^

Vermont farmer is presented with "good milk flavor rating" by his dairy, as part of a statewide program in cooperation with USDA to improve the flavor of Vermont milk.

Vermont milk truckdriver uses his trained A farmer judges the flavor of a sample of milk sense of smeil to search for any off-odor from his own herd. To their surprise, farmers in the farm bulk milk tank, while farmer pours sometimes have downgraded their own milk in milk. samples. Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, with matching funds, a very intensive and Wisconsin. effort to upgrade the quality of the Here are some specific examples of State's butter production by improv- market quality work. ing the processing facilities, equip- ment, and handling. FLAVOR PROGRAMS assist producers and Only about 40 percent of the butter marketers in preventing off-flavor in production, as measured by sample their milk. inspections, was of Wisconsin grade These programs, in existence sev- A and AA in 1951, but by 1964 this eral years, have developed to where had gone up to 79 percent. milk handlers have made it a part of their regular procurement program to SEVERAL STATES conduct quality im- check flavor and assist producers in provement work on soft-serve and overcoming flavor defects. Producers other frozen dairy desserts to assure have made significant improvements in wholesomeness. their milking facilities and handling Marketing service personnel collect practices to protect flavor. Emphasis samples of mixed and finished products recently has been shifted from the from retail outlets, check temperatures farm to working with processors and and storage conditions, and make retailers in studying and correcting chemical, bacteriological, and flavor the adverse effect on milk flavor of new and odor testing examinations of the developments in handling, processing, samples. packaging, and distribution. Owners of manufacturing plants and retailers are helped to adjust handling STARTING IN I 95 I the Wisconsin De- and storage operations. Results of the partment of Agriculture undertook. State project activities are analyzed

IMPROVEMENTS IN THE QUALITY OF WISCONSIN BUTTER, under the Federal-State matched fund program, 1951-1964 VOLUME GRADED (Percent) 100

79%

GRADES A and AA

1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964

337 periodically to see whether there is Hawaii conducted a project to im- need to revamp laws and regulations prove and standardize flavor in fresh for the manufacture, handling, and papayas, to insure better consumer sale of these popular desserts. acceptance both locally and in export Special studies evaluate the extent markets. A collection of field data to of sediment in grade A bulk tank milk establish a desirable sugar-acid ratio and suggest improvements, for coop- for the fruit was completed and ana- erating processing plants. Emphasis is lyzed. Information was also obtained placed on methods for drawing sam- on consumer preferences for flavor. ples, frequency of taking samples, cri- Based on these findings, recommen- teria for determining degree of sedi- dations for a regulatory program that mentation, and steps to be taken to covers maturity standards have been prevent sedimentation. Results of the developed. work provide guidelines so commer- cial dairies can set up their own in- UNDER A quality improvement pro- ternal procedures for periodic testing gram, New Mexico encouraged grow- of sedimentation in milk received from ers and shippers to use official grade bulk tank producers. standards and the services of the Federal-State Inspection Service for THE MARYLAND Department of Mar- marketing lettuce and onions. In 1964, kets started work in 1960 with Eastern about 90 percent of the lettuce and 75 Shore processors to upgrade the qual- percent of the onion crop were being ity of broilers being processed. marketed on certified grades, com- Specialists help three plants identify pared to 1963 when 40 percent of the causes of downgrading, adopt correc- lettuce and a negligible volume of tive measures, and install quality con- onions were shipped under official trol systems to maintain improved inspection. performance. Production of grade A Projects designed to develop new and broilers increased from 46 percent of expanded markets and promote great- the total volume in i960 to 69 percent er consumption of agricultural prod- in 1964. Similar work is going on in ucts were conducted in fiscal year 1965 the State of Alabama. by 40 State departments of agriculture.

INCREASE IN PERCENTAGE OF TOP-GRADE BROILERS PRODUCED by three Maryland poultry processing plants under the Federal-State nnatched fund program on quality control since 1960

GRADE A BROILERS PRODUCED (Percent) 69% 70 1 60 WE H - 50 46% ■■■

40 m ^^^Hl 1 30

20 - -

10

0 ''' '"^^9 ..-. r^áfll^H PLANT A PLANT B PLANTO AVERAGE OF THE THREE PLANTS

338